Leland Royce Harper: Multiverse deism: shifting perspectives of God and the world

International Journal for Philosophy of Religion -     

How Valuable Could a Person Be?*

We investigate the value of persons. Our primary goal is to chart a path from equal and extreme value to infinite value. We advance two arguments. Each argument offers a reason to think that equal and extreme value are best accounted for if we are infinitely valuable. We then raise some difficult but fruitful questions about the possible grounds or sources of our infinite value, if we indeed have such value.     

The sound-board account of reasoning: A one-system alternative to dual-process theory

In order to explain the effects found in the heuristics and biases literature, dual-process theories of reasoning claim that human reasoning is of two kinds: Type-1 processing is fast, automatic, and associative, while Type-2 reasoning is slow, controlled, and rule based. If human reasoning is so divided, it would have important consequences for morality, epistemology, and philosophy of mind. Although dual-process theorists have typically argued for their position by way of an inference to the best explanation, they have generally failed to consider alternative hypotheses. Worse still, it is unclear how we might test dual-process theories. In this article, I offer a one-system theory, which I call the Sound-Board Account of Reasoning, according to which there is one reasoning system which is flexible, allowing the properties used to distinguished Type-1 and Type-2 reasoning to cross-cut one another. I empirically distinguish my theory from the two dominant versions of dual-process theory (parallel-competitive and default-interventionist dual-process theory) and argue that my theory’s predictions are confirmed over both of these versions of dual-process theory.     

Scaling Up the Self,Scaling Down the World: Self-objectification and the Politics of Carbon Offsets and Personalised Genomics

Two global initiatives, the Genographic Project and the Carbon Lottery, share an ambition to make abstract, global processes—human evolution and climate change—comprehensible and engaging to non-specialists. Despite their differences, they both do so by means of self-objectifications that scale up the selves of participants and scale down complex, spatio-temporal models of human–world relations. The author’s auto-ethnographic experiences in both initiatives illustrate how carbon calculators and personalised genomics involve a pragmatics of scale that evaluates and compares users on the basis of their relative expression of, or deviation from, a standard. Furthermore, this is not based on actual resources that participants do or do not possess, but on forms of capitalist exchange that underwrite carbon trading and population genomics, as experts and corporations make intellectual property derived from purportedly rare DNA and sustainable practices, which are typically indigenous and non-western. In fact, the global inequalities that make possible transactions in carbon offsets and genetic ancestry are obscured from view. As a result, though initiatives like the Genographic Project and Carbon Lottery may provide comprehensible self-objectifications, they potentially make the world more unequal in the process.     

Parafoveal letter-position coding in reading

The masked-priming lexical decision task has been the paradigm of choice for investigating how readers code for letter identity and position. Insight into the temporal integration of information between prime and target words has pointed out, among other things, that readers do not code for the absolute position of letters. This conception has spurred various accounts of the word recognition process, but the results at present do not favor one account in particular. Thus, employing a new strategy, the present study moves out of the arena of temporal- and into the arena of spatial information integration. We present two lexical decision experiments that tested how the processing of six-letter target words is influenced by simultaneously presented flanking stimuli (each stimulus was presented for 150 ms). We manipulated the orthographic relatedness between the targets and flankers, in terms of both letter identity (same/different letters based on the target’s outer/inner letters) and letter position (intact/reversed order of letters and of flankers, contiguous/noncontiguous flankers). Target processing was strongly facilitated by same-letter flankers, and this facilitatory effect was modulated by both letter/flanker order and contiguity. However, when the flankers consisted of the target’s inner-positioned letters alone, letter order no longer mattered. These findings suggest that readers may code for the relative position of letters using words’ edges as spatial points of reference. We conclude that the flanker paradigm provides a fruitful means to investigate letter-position coding in the fovea and parafovea.     

Liberal and Conservative Values: What We Can Learn From Congressional Tweets

Past research using self‐report questionnaires administered to ordinary citizens demonstrates that value priorities differ as a function of one's political ideology, but it is unclear whether this conclusion applies to political elites, who are presumably seeking to appeal to very broad constituencies. We used quantitative methods of textual analysis to investigate value‐laden language in a collection of 577,555 messages sent from the public Twitter accounts of over 400 members of the U.S. Congress between 2012 and 2014. Consistent with theoretical expectations, we observed that Republican and conservative legislators stressed values of tradition, conformity, and national security (as well as self‐direction), whereas Democratic and liberal legislators stressed values of benevolence, universalism, hedonism, and social/economic security (as well as achievement). Implications for the large‐scale observational study of political psychology are explored.     

Efficacy of In-Home Parent-Child Interaction Therapy

ABSTRACT

In recent years, there has been much discussion of the efficacy of mental health interventions for children as well as the transportation of empirically-supported treatments (ESTs) to field settings. A logical initial step in this line of research is to examine whether the efficacy of ESTs can be demonstrated in community settings such as in the home environment. The purpose of the study was to examine the efficacy of an in-home Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) program using a single-subject, A/B design across five subjects with staggered baselines. Decreases in caregiver use of negative behavior and caregiver-reported child behavior problems were observed for the three families that completed treatment. In addition, completers demonstrated increases in child compliance, caregiver use of positive behavior, and contingent praise. Data regarding caregivers' reported parenting stress and caregiver proportion of direct commands were less convincing. All three dyads completing treatment reported satisfaction with the intervention. Clinical implications regarding the possible benefits of PCIT for improving the effectiveness of home visiting programs are discussed as well as directions for future research.